Legal Opinion
Howard v. United States
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided March 20, 2012No. 94S00-1106-CQ-333PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DICKSON, Justice.
The United States Court of Federal Claims has certified for our resolution the following question:
Under Indiana law, are railbanking and interim trail use pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1247(d) uses that are within the scope of the easements acquired by the railroad companies either by prescription, condemnation, or the deed at issue; and if either is not within the scope of the easements originally acquired, is rail-banking with interim tr[ai]l use a shifting public use?
Pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 64, we accepted the question and now answer both parts in the negative. Under…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Preseault v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Preseault v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- McCauley v. HarrisIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
- Brown v. HeidersbachIndiana Court of Appeals · 1977
- New York Central Railroad v. YarianIndiana Supreme Court · 1942
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Henry C. Wedemeyer v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- Macy Elevator, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Howard v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Twin Lakes Regional Sewer District v. Robert W. Teumer and Paula K. TeumerIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013
- In re HowellIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.